MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353057831 · doi:10.5770/cgj.26.659

Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) Partners Forum and Science Days 2022: Abstracts from the Poster Sessions October 11–14, 2022

2023· article· en· W4353057831 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geriatrics Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurodegenerationGerontologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plain Language Summary: Our study investigated the impact of CPAP on cognition in cognitively impaired sleep apnea patients while controlling for daytime sleepiness.Patients using CPAP had increased cognitive scores at follow-up relative to patients who were non users.These findings indicate that CPAP may stabilize cognitive dysfunction in a manner outside of simply reducing daytime sleepiness.Study Objectives: To characterize the impact of CPAP use on cognition in a clinical cohort with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and cognitive impairment due to neurodegenerative or vascular etiologies after controlling for baseline sleepiness.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 158 patients with cognitive impairment and an OSA diagnosis confirmed with in-laboratory polysomnography or home sleep apnea testing (mean age 69.9 ± 10.7; 69% male); who had used CPAP for 2-12 months.Baseline and follow-up Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) were obtained from clinical and research visits conducted before and after CPAP initiation.Good CPAP adherence was defined as CPAP use x≥4 hr/night, 7 days/week at follow-up.Associations between good CPAP adherence and follow-up cognitive scores were analyzed using multivariable linear mixed-effects models.Results: After adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, baseline ESS, duration of CPAP therapy, relevant comorbidities and the random effect of research study cohort, good CPAP adherence (compared to poor CPAP adherence) was associated with a 2.8-point (1.77 -3.79) increase in follow-up MoCA scores (p=7.06×10-8) and a 1.2-point (0.11 -2.22) increase in follow-up MMSE scores (p=0.031). Conclusions:In patients with OSA and cognitive impairment due to a neurodegenerative or vascular etiology, cognitive dysfunction may be stabilized with good adherence to CPAP therapy.The findings of this study will aid in motivating patients to use CPAP and support future randomized controlled trials in this area.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geriatrics JournalSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207